Literature DB >> 20454787

Incidental action observation modulates muscle activity.

Sukhvinder S Obhi1, Jeremy Hogeveen.   

Abstract

Similar circuits in the brain are engaged during the performance and observation of identical actions. Such engagement manifests in priming effects, where observation of an action leads to faster production of that action and slower production of an action involving a different movement of the same effector (e.g. observed finger flexion vs. produced finger extension), or a completely different effector (e.g. observed hand action vs. produced leg action). Here, we asked whether priming occurs for actions involving identical muscle groups where the degree of muscle contraction in observed actions was the same or different to that underlying an instructed response and whether patterns of muscle activation were also affected. Participants held an unseen rubber ball between their forefinger and thumb and responded to colour cues instructing a hard or a soft squeeze, whilst EMG activity from the first dorsal interosseous and the abductor pollicis brevis was recorded. The colour cues were superimposed on videos depicting a hard or soft squeeze of an identical rubber ball. Thus, there were two congruent (observe hard, produce hard; observe soft, produce soft) and two incongruent (observe hard, produce soft; observe soft, produce hard) conditions. Results showed that reaction time was slowed and EMG activity was modulated in the direction of the difference between observed and instructed squeezing movements. Hence, neural circuits underlying action observation are sensitive not only to differences in the actual muscle groups underlying observed actions but also to different extents of activation of the same muscle groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20454787     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-010-2253-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  46 in total

1.  Action induction through action observation.

Authors:  Sara De Maeght; Wolfgang Prinz
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2004-02-03

Review 2.  The Theory of Event Coding (TEC): a framework for perception and action planning.

Authors:  B Hommel; J Müsseler; G Aschersleben; W Prinz
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 12.579

Review 3.  The mirror neuron system and the consequences of its dysfunction.

Authors:  Marco Iacoboni; Mirella Dapretto
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2006-11-08       Impact factor: 34.870

4.  Action observation and acquired motor skills: an FMRI study with expert dancers.

Authors:  B Calvo-Merino; D E Glaser; J Grèzes; R E Passingham; P Haggard
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2004-12-22       Impact factor: 5.357

5.  Robotic movement elicits automatic imitation.

Authors:  Clare Press; Geoffrey Bird; Rüdiger Flach; Cecilia Heyes
Journal:  Brain Res Cogn Brain Res       Date:  2005-12

6.  Functional organization of inferior area 6 in the macaque monkey. II. Area F5 and the control of distal movements.

Authors:  G Rizzolatti; R Camarda; L Fogassi; M Gentilucci; G Luppino; M Matelli
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Neuronal population coding of movement direction.

Authors:  A P Georgopoulos; A B Schwartz; R E Kettner
Journal:  Science       Date:  1986-09-26       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Sensorimotor learning configures the human mirror system.

Authors:  Caroline Catmur; Vincent Walsh; Cecilia Heyes
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2007-08-23       Impact factor: 10.834

Review 9.  Mirror neuron system: basic findings and clinical applications.

Authors:  Marco Iacoboni; John C Mazziotta
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 10.422

Review 10.  Grasping objects: the cortical mechanisms of visuomotor transformation.

Authors:  M Jeannerod; M A Arbib; G Rizzolatti; H Sakata
Journal:  Trends Neurosci       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 13.837

View more
  7 in total

1.  Moving together: toward understanding the mechanisms of joint action.

Authors:  Sukhvinder S Obhi; Natalie Sebanz
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Robotic movement preferentially engages the action observation network.

Authors:  Emily S Cross; Roman Liepelt; Antonia F de C Hamilton; Jim Parkinson; Richard Ramsey; Waltraud Stadler; Wolfgang Prinz
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2011-09-06       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  Experiencing ownership over a dark-skinned body reduces implicit racial bias.

Authors:  Lara Maister; Natalie Sebanz; Günther Knoblich; Manos Tsakiris
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2013-05-13

4.  Automatic imitation is automatic, but less so for narcissists.

Authors:  Jeremy Hogeveen; Sukhvinder S Obhi
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-11-28       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Activity in primary motor cortex during action observation covaries with subsequent behavioral changes in execution.

Authors:  Nadav Aridan; Roy Mukamel
Journal:  Brain Behav       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 2.708

6.  Children do not distinguish efficient from inefficient actions during observation.

Authors:  Ori Ossmy; Danyang Han; Brianna E Kaplan; Melody Xu; Catherine Bianco; Roy Mukamel; Karen E Adolph
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-09-13       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Automatic imitation in rhythmical actions: kinematic fidelity and the effects of compatibility, delay, and visual monitoring.

Authors:  Daniel L Eaves; Martine Turgeon; Stefan Vogt
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-10-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.